Srila Gurudeva’s Will “As It Is.”


Recently Sripada Trivikrama Maharaja posted an annotated version of Srila Gurudeva’s Will on his facebook wall. This prompted some renewed interest in the Will and discussion of various issues. Some of my comments are attached below and will also appear in future blogs.


October 22, 2012 #1 — Renewed Interest

Maharaja, I do not believe the version of the Will you are showing above is actually the “LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT – (In full)” as it is described therein. 

The “Will” you presented here is the “annotated” version.

Not only were notes added to it, text was also removed from it. Unless you can show that the Will presented above is the same Will submitted to the court for probate, I believe the version we posted on our website more than two years ago represents the authentic document.

That version of the “Last Will and Testament” posted to our website on 9/17/10 may be viewed here:

I will soon be posting an article on our website addressing the questions of some devotees as to the authenticity of Srila Gurudeva’s Last Will and Testament as well as other questions pertaining to a court decision related to the Will’s probate.

I am happy to see this renewed interest in Srila Govinda Maharaja’s Will. It is very important that it be understood properly.
October 22, #2 — The Proper Understanding.

Srila Gurudeva’s Will must be understood as he, the author, intended it.

It is he, through his Will, who delineates the function and members of the Acharya Sabha. It is not for the International Acharya Board (“IAB”) [Sripadas Acharya Maharaja, Janardana Maharaja, Avadhuta Maharaja, Ashrama Maharaja, Goswami Maharaja] to determine the function and form of the Will, to alter its meaning or determine the members and function of the Acharya Sabha.

As Prabhu Jagadananda pointed out, Gurudeva directed the six acharyas he named in his Will to form an Acharya Sabha after his disappearance.

[An Acharya Board (Acharya Sabha) shall be formed, composed of initiating acharyas, to consult with one another regarding all spiritual matters and to give guidance to all Trust Boards.]

Because four of the six acharyas [Sripadas Acharya Maharaja, Janardana Maharaja, Avadhuta Maharaja, Ashrama Maharaja] blocked its formation, it was never done.

Instead, the IAB invented its own imaginary interpretations of the Will to justify disregarding it.

These concoctions should be rejected with the same rigor as Mahaprabhu rejected the imaginary interpretations of the “Vedanta-sutra” by Sri Sarvabhauma.

With respect, to say “it’s for the Acharya Board [IAB] to decide” is, to ignore Gurudeva’s direction for the function of the IAB, or even a properly formed Acharya Sabha, neither of which was authorized to “decide” anything for anyone, other than themselves.

It is Srila Govinda Maharaja’s instructions that descend from the Absolute Plane. To accept whatever the IAB decides, “collectively as a body, as a whole, that is Absolute”, “is foolish.”

82.03.06.B after GBC meeting w. Srila Sridhara Maharaja (“SSM”) on 82.03.05



Yashomatinandana dasa (Ynd)- No. Individually they [GBC} are not Absolute. But collectively as a body, as a whole, that is Absolute.


SSM- That can never be. That is foolish.


Ynd- Because that is the only representative of Prabhupada [Srila Swami Maharaja].


SSM- That is foolish.



Ynd- Our idea is that the ideal is non-different from the organization.


SSM- …you say the organization, because it is created by Swami Maharaja, it is a perfect one… So, this organization, whatever they will create, the majority, that is God. I differ there.

When you say “it’s for the Acharya Board [IAB] to decide”, you indirectly lend support to those who say the Will did not come from Gurudeva, it was “manipulated” by others.

You are indirectly approving such manipulation by the IAB.

In other words, you are condoning the IAB’s deciding what Gurudeva’s Will is, it’s for them to decide. No. Gurudeva is the one to decide what his Will should be.

For the followers of Srila Gurudeva, our full attention should first be given to what Gurudeva said, not what the IAB says.

For example, Srila Gurudeva said “Sripad Trivikram Maharaj is a respected person there and he will be the Acharya of Brazil.”

The IAB invented a new meaning and said “Acharya Maharaja will be the acharya for Brazil, and the rest of the world.”

This is an example of deviation from the instructions of the acharya.

keha ta’ acarya ajnaya, keha ta’ svatantra
sva-mata kalpana kare daiva-paratantra

“Some of the disciples strictly accepted the orders of the acarya, and others deviated, independently concocting their own opinions under the spell of daivi-maya.”

If Gurudeva’s direction is not clear on some point, then of course we should look to those servitors of his, who we respect and trust, for elucidation.

Otherwise, we should accept and follow the clear direction of our guru.